I spent a few hours yesterday trying to put my thoughts down about this article on class action suits. A power failure this morning (probably due to all the rain we are having) washed away my attempt, which was far from done.
The article talks about Silica litigation and how an aggressive defense discovered upon investigation, the plaintiffs in these cases were often the same plaintiff’s in asbestos litigation, and that at least some of the doctors signing off on these plaintiffs manufactured the bad diagnosis in exchange for money.
This raises a lot of issues about prior class action litigation. Have we been bankrupting companies and enriching lawyers with no evidence? I can’t quite decide who is more to blame – the plaintiff lawyers for sending out invitations by mail to prospective plaintiffs with no apparent follow-up, or the defense lawyers for not bothering to check them out.
It’s a subject I hope to get back to as time permits.
On a different note the following comment was left on this blog this morning:
In the last 48 hours, I keep reading that the Government is pushing a major effort to close down websites and blogs with “questionable” content.
If true, from a legal or political perspective what is the motive?
I have to admit to not following this crackdown or being aware that it was happening. This article gives some history of the Supreme Court I know it when I see it obscenity decision outlined in Miller v California in 1973.
As for motive – perhaps the idea is to rally the base. I’m the base, and this sort of attack on private life doesn’t rally me. OTOH a recent decision in Oregon now makes it legal to show live sex acts in your local bar, so who knows where we are headed?